__/ [ Andrew Heenan ] on Friday 31 March 2006 10:59 \__
>> Google created rel="nofollow" to supposedly save the world from
>> spam. The effectiveness (or lack thereof) of this mechanism should be
>> addressed in its own right. Either way, has a hidden agenda has been
>> revealed? Lo and behold! Google snuck in a mechanism to eradicate
>> link farms and end manipulation of perceived site status.
> Probably the worst kept secret of all time.
> Once it was announced that M$N and Yahho! had agreed to recognize
> 'nofollow', it was obvious that there was more in the pipeline, and many
> forums spotted this - some faster than others ;o)
> 'nofollow' makes webmasters responsible for their actions; Google sitemaps
> have potential, too. When Google first mentions both in the same sentance,
> it's time for spammers to reach for their brown trousers - big time.
Google sitemaps? How so? I am not antagonising, but I would like to hear your
take on it.
The introduction of Google sitemaps jeopardises Google's competitors, at
least as *I* see it (play catch-up; 'shape up or slip out'). It also
led/will lead to neglect of human-readable sitemaps unless tools are created
to convert XML to a browser-bound menus (e.g. siteinfo.xml in Alexa/A9). it
has potential for organising the WWW, given the tools. RSS feeds likewise.
Roy S. Schestowitz
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
10:55am up 23 days 0:40, 10 users, load average: 1.21, 1.35, 0.92
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms